Skip to main content

A housing development near the Three Sisters mountains on the eastern edge of Canmore, Alta., is shown on July 2, 2017. The community has rejected a second proposed development project that raised concerns about wildlife, affordable housing and taxes.Colette Derworiz/The Canadian Press

Town council in a popular Alberta mountain community has rejected a second proposed development project that raised concerns about wildlife, affordable housing and taxes.

The proposed Three Sisters Village and Smith Creek projects in Canmore, west of Calgary, would have almost doubled the town’s population in the coming decades.

The two proposals included about 80 per cent of the town’s remaining developable land.

Council had already rejected Smith Creek in a unanimous decision last month. On Tuesday, it rejected the Three Sisters Village plan in a 6-1 vote.

“I’m disappointed,” said Mayor John Borrowman, who was the lone vote in favour of the second proposal. “I saw this as an opportunity to bring some balance to our community. Now that balance will continue to be uncertain, until some future time.

“But I certainly will accept and support the decision of council.”

A public hearing on the two developments took seven days and heard from more than 200 people concerned about the possible effects on the town and on wildlife in the area. Hundreds of others wrote letters opposed to the projects.

Councillors said they couldn’t support the Three Sisters proposal despite amendments that were made to improve the overall plan.

“It’s far and above better than it was when it first came to us,” said Councillor Jeff Hilstad. “But I do think there are still areas that need to be addressed that just can’t be addressed through amendments.”

Councillor Vi Sandford said she still had concerns about wildlife, as well as growth in the town.

“The footprint size and the scale and the scope of this (plan) is still a concern to the community,” she said.

“We need to be planning and building for the future with this long-term project.”

Ms. Sandford added the land is developable in an appropriate way, but the latest proposal didn’t achieve that.

A spokesman for the developers said they are disappointed by Tuesday’s decision.

“Both plans were years in the making,” said Chris Ollenberger, director of strategy and development with Three Sisters Mountain Village. “We stand by our proposals that we submitted.

“They are good proposals.”

He said the developers are considering their options such as whether to ask for an appeal through the municipal government board, an independent, quasi-judicial provincial body that hears disputes about assessment and planning matters.

Experts have said the two proposals to provide homes for up to 14,500 added residents and tourists would have added more pressure to an already busy valley.

Karsten Heuer, a wildlife biologist, said he was elated by Tuesday’s decision to reject the development.

“We were reminded that democracy still works in Canmore,” he said in an interview. “It was a huge outpouring of concern in the last five months.”

Some residents, he said, are now discussing whether it would be possible to raise enough money to try to purchase and take control of some of the land for conservation purposes.

Mr. Heuer and others have raised concerns about development in an area used by wildlife to move around in the Rocky Mountains.

The wildlife corridor — and how wide it needs to be to allow animals such as grizzly bears, elk and wolves to move efficiently — has been debated ever since a 1992 environmental assessment found it to be an important area.

We have a weekly Western Canada newsletter written by our B.C. and Alberta bureau chiefs, providing a comprehensive package of the news you need to know about the region and its place in the issues facing Canada. Sign up today.